On 22/03/16 17:37, Nathan Scott wrote:
Hi Ken,
...
Yep, not sure why its not using __pmMktime(3) ... looking again, I suspect
that was the intent rather than the python time call there.
Well __pmMktime is not exposed in the Python wrapper AFAICT, so that
could be an initial obstacle.
Why don't we skip all the inseconds stuff and simply
return str(timetuple)
That would give a string like "(2003, 02, 3, ...)" and not a timestamp in
the mktime form we were after I guess.
But this is only in the __str__() method and I'm not sure anyone but the
QA test cares ... ???
> and why is str(..) needed in the first case, but not the second?
and I still have no clue on this.
Not sure either, I'll dig deeper on both fronts tomorrow.
OK, thanks.
|